NikonPoint

Arjay hat geschrieben:Was aber wirklich nervt, ist das - freundlich gesagt - unkonventionelle Handling des Programms. Ich arbeite beruflich mit einer ganzen Latte verschiedenster Windows-Programme, und ich habe bisher wirklich kein anderes Programm gefunden, dessen Bedieneroberfläche derart anders ist als die anderer Programme.

1. Consistency
Things that work one way in one part of the system should work the same way in other parts. This allows users to learn something once, then apply that knowledge again and again as they use the computer. 
Just as important as consistency within a program is consistency between programs. No matter how important your program is, it won't be the only one that your customers are using. If every other program uses a certain key combination to trigger the Save command, it's not a good idea to use that combination to mean Send in your mail program. Similar caveats apply to the use of such standard interface elements as menus and windows. Even if your program might be made slightly better by making these behave in a nonstandard manner, it's guaranteed to drive your users crazy. If they have any kind of choice, it will also drive them to a competitor's product. 

...

(Breaking the) Rule #2: Make It Look Different.
Users leam how to use an interface by figuring out what each interface element does, then applying that knowledge again and again, from application to application. For instance, once they know what a checkbox is, they'll expect that checkbox to act the same way, whether it's in MegaWrite Pro or UltraCAD III. Users depend on this sort of consistency so much that if you take a standard element, such as a button, and make it look different, they will think of it as a new element, and try their damdest to figure out what it does differently. Failing that, users will make up stories to explain the hidden differences between the two. The real reason-say you just got tired of the standard appearance-might escape them. 

There are three dominant paradigms in the conceptual and visual design of user interfaces: implementation-centric, metaphoric, and idiomatic. The implementation-centric interfaces are based on understanding how things work-a difficult proposition. Metaphoric interfaces are based on intuiting how things work-a risky method. Idiomatic interfaces, however, are based on learning how to accomplish things-a natural, human process. 
....


Implementation-centric interfaces 

Implementation-centric user interfaces are widespread in the computer industry. These interfaces are expressed in terms of their construction, of how they are built. In order to successfully use them, the user must understand how the software works internally. Following the implementation-centric paradigm means user-interface design based exclusively on the implementation model. The overwhelming majority of software programs today are implementation-centric in that they show us, without any hint of shame, precisely how they are built. There is one button per function, one dialog per module of code, and the commands and processes precisely echo the internal data structures and algorithms. 
We can see how an implementation model interface ticks by learning how to run its program. The problem is that the reverse is also true: We must learn how the program works in order to successfully use the interface. Engineers want to know how things work, so the implementation-centric paradigm is very satisfying to them (which is the reason, in addition to ease of construction, why so much of our software follows it). Engineers prefer to see the gears and levers and valves because it helps them understand what is going on inside the machine. That those artifacts needlessly complicate the interface seems a small price to pay. Engineers may want to understand the inner workings, but most users don't have either the time or desire. They'd much rather be successful than be knowledgeable, a preference that is often hard for engineers to understand. 

jodi2 hat geschrieben:Ok, dann liegt es bei mir wohl daran, daß ich nicht mit den anderen Programmen "vorbelastet" bin. D.h. das Problem ist, einfach gesagt, daß NC nicht der üblichen Bedienung bei EBVs folgt, so wie ich es jetzt verstanden hab.

No matter how important your program is, it won't be the only one that your customers are using.

beta hat geschrieben:Auch cool finde ich den Satz wenn man NC öffnet und da so eine weisse Fläche sieht wo drin steht: „Legen Sie das Bild hier ab, um es zu öffnen.”